19112 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 73 / Tuesday, April 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

1Preventing Undue Discrimination and 

Preference in Transmission Service, Order No. 890, 

72 FR 12266 (March 15, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¶ 31,241 (2007), reh’g pending (Order No. 890). 

2 Id. 

3Promoting Wholesale Competition Through 

Open Access Non-discriminatory Transmission 

Services by Public Utilities; Recovery of Stranded 

Costs by Public Utilities and Transmitting Utilities, 

Order No. 888, 61 FR 21540 (May 10, 1996), FERC 

Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,036 (1996), order on reh’g, Order 

No. 888–A, 62 FR 12274 (Mar. 14, 1997), FERC 

Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,048 (1997), order on reh’g, Order 

No. 888–B, 81 FERC ¶ 61,248 (1997), order on reh’g, 

Order No. 888–C, 82 FERC ¶ 61,046 (1998), aff’d 

in relevant part sub nom. Transmission Access 

Policy Study Group v. FERC, 225 F.3d 667 (D.C. Cir. 

2000) (TAPS v. FERC), aff’d sub nom. New York v. 

FERC, 535 U.S. 1 (2002). 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(i) The Manager, Engine Certification 

Office, has the authority to approve 

alternative methods of compliance for this 

AD if requested using the procedures found 

in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Related Information 

(j) The EASA airworthiness directive 2007–

0026, dated February 1, 2007, also addresses 

the subject of this AD. 

Material Incorporated by Reference 

(k) You must use Turbomeca Alert 

Mandatory Service Bulletin (ASB) No. A292 

73 2814, Update No. 1, dated January 11, 

2005; or ASB No. A292 73 2814, Update No. 

2, dated December 15, 2006, to perform the 

actions required by this AD. The Director of 

the Federal Register previously approved the 

incorporation by reference of ASB No. A292 

73 2814, Update No. 1, dated January 11, 

2005, on July 11, 2005 (70 FR 36480; June 24, 

2005). The Director of the Federal Register 

approved the incorporation by reference of 

ASB No. A292 73 2814, Update No. 2, dated 

December 15, 2006, in accordance with 5 

U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Contact 

Turbomeca S.A., 40220 Tarnos, France; 

telephone 33 05 59 74 40 00, fax 33 05 59 

74 45 15, for a copy of this service 

information. You may review copies at the 

FAA, New England Region, Office of the 

Regional Counsel, 12 New England Executive 

Park, Burlington, MA; or at the National 

Archives and Records Administration 

(NARA). For information on the availability 

of this material at NARA, call 202–741–6030, 

or go to: http://www.archives.gov/ 

federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ 

ibr_locations.html. 

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on 

April 9, 2007. 

Peter A. White, 

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–7115 Filed 4–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Parts 35 and 37 

[Docket Nos. RM05–17–000 and RM05–25–

000; Order No. 890] 

Preventing Undue Discrimination and 

Preference in Transmission Service 

Issued April 11, 2007. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Order granting extension of 

compliance action dates. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission) is 

extending certain deadlines for 

compliance actions required by Order 

No. 890, the final rule issued in this 

proceeding on February 16, 2007. 

DATES: The date by which transmission 

providers must implement certain 

reforms adopted in Order No. 890 is 

hereby extended by 60 days, to July 13, 

2007, as set forth in Appendix A of this 

order. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: W. 

Mason Emnett (Legal Information), 

Office of the General Counsel—Energy 

Markets, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–6540. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Before 

Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, 

Chairman; Suedeen G. Kelly, Marc 

Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, and Jon 

Wellinghoff. 

Order Granting Extension of 

Compliance Action Dates 

1. On March 21, 2007, Tampa Electric 

Company (Tampa Electric) together with 

Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) 

filed a motion for extension of deadlines 

relating to the implementation of 

additional functionality for the Open 

Access Same-Time Information System 

(OASIS) and the posting of new 

transmission-related metrics as outlined 

in Order No. 890.1 On March 29, 2007, 

Tampa Electric and FPL supplemented 

their motion with a preliminary 

assessment of technical work required 

to implement the additional OASIS 

functionality and the posting of new 

transmission-related metrics. 

2. On March 23, 2007, the Edison 

Electric Institute (EEI) filed a motion 

requesting that the Commission extend 

to 120 days from publication of Order 

No. 890 in the Federal Register all 

deadlines currently set as less than 120 

days as applied to transmission 

providers that are not members of an 

Independent System Operator (ISO) or 

Regional Transmission Organization 

(RTO). On March 29, 2007, EEI filed a 

second motion to extend the filing 

deadline for ISO and RTO transmission 

providers’ ‘‘strawman’’ proposals 

detailing compliance with each of the 

nine planning principles adopted in 

Order No. 890. 

3. On April 3, 2007, E.ON U.S. LLC 

(E.ON) filed a motion stating its support 

of EEI’s request to allow utilities not 

participating in an ISO or RTO an 

additional 60 days to comply with the 

non-rate terms and conditions set out in 

Order No. 890, but requesting a 90-day 

extension for submission of its Federal 

Power Act (FPA) section 206 

compliance filing due to E.ON’s 

particular circumstances. 

4. Finally, on April 9, 2007, Portland 

General Electric Company (PGE) filed a 

motion seeking an extension of 

deadlines associated with the optional 

filing under FPA section 205 regarding 

previously-approved variations from the 

pro forma Open Access Transmission 

Tariff (OATT). 

5. For the reasons outlined below, the 

Commission grants in part the March 

23, 2007, motion of EEI and denies the 

March 29, 2007, motion of EEI, as well 

as the subsequent motions of E.ON and 

PGE. Accordingly, the joint motion of 

Tampa Electric and FPL, as 

supplemented, is rejected as moot. 

I. Background 

6. On February 16, 2007, the 

Commission issued Order No. 890 on 

Preventing Undue Discrimination and 

Preference in Transmission Service in 

these dockets.2 In Order No. 890, the 

Commission amended its regulations 

and the pro forma OATT, adopted in 

Order No. 888,3 to ensure that 

transmission services are provided on a 

basis that is just, reasonable and not 

unduly discriminatory or preferential. 

The Commission designed Order No. 

890 to: (1) Strengthen the pro forma 

OATT to ensure that it achieves its 

original purpose of remedying undue 

discrimination; (2) provide greater 

specificity to reduce opportunities for 

undue discrimination and facilitate the 

Commission’s enforcement; and (3) 

increase transparency in the rules 

applicable to planning and use of the 

transmission system. 

7. Order No. 890 established a number 

of compliance requirements with 

corresponding deadlines, each 

necessary to achieve its stated goals. 

Among other things, transmission 

providers that have not been approved 

as ISOs or RTOs, and whose 

transmission facilities are not under the 

control of an ISO or RTO, were directed 

to submit, within 60 days after 

publication of Order No. 890 in the 

Federal Register, i.e., May 14, 2007, 

filings under section 206 of the FPA that 

contain the non-rate terms and 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 73 / Tuesday, April 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 19113 

4Order No. 890 at P 139. 

5 Id. at P 135. 

6 Id. at P 223. 

7 Id. at P 141. 

8 Id. 

9 Id. at P 139. 

conditions set forth in the order.4

Within 75 days of publication, i.e., May 

29, 2007, all transmission providers 

must post a ‘‘strawman’’ proposal for 

compliance with each of the nine 

planning principles adopted in Order 

No. 890.5 The Commission also 

requested that the North American 

Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) 

and the North American Energy 

Standards Board (NAESB) file, within 

90 days from publication, i.e., June 13, 

2007, a joint status report that contains 

a work plan for completion of business 

practices and standards related to 

calculation of Available Transfer 

Capability (ATC).6 NAESB was further 

requested to file a status report and 

work plan for the completion of the 

OASIS functionality or uniform 

business practices related to reforms 

adopted in Order No. 890.7 The 

Commission required each transmission 

provider to develop, within 90 days 

from publication, i.e., June 13, 2007, its 

own OASIS functionality or business 

practices necessary to implement 

certain reforms ordered in Order No. 

890 pending completion of the NERC 

and NAESB processes.8 Finally, the 

Commission required transmission 

providers to comply with a number of 

new regulations by Order No. 890’s 

effective date of May 14, 2007. 

8. In addition to these compliance 

obligations, the Commission provided 

an optional 205 procedure for 

transmission providers seeking to 

maintain previously-approved 

variations from the Order No. 888 pro 

forma OATT that were affected by the 

reforms adopted in Order No. 890. To 

the extent a transmission provider 

wishes to maintain these previouslyapproved variations, the Commission 

stated that the transmission provider 

would have to demonstrate that the 

relevant tariff provisions continue to be 

consistent with or superior to the pro 

forma OATT as modified by Order No. 

890. The Commission provided that 

such demonstrations could be made in 

an FPA section 205 filing submitted 

within 30 days after publication of 

Order No. 890 in the Federal Register, 

i.e., April 16, 2007. The Commission 

stated that each applicant should 

request that these proposed tariff 

provisions be made effective as of the 

date of the transmission provider’s 

section 206 compliance filing.9

II. Motions for Extension 

9. Tampa Electric and FPL seek 

extension of compliance deadlines 

related to the implementation of 

additional OASIS functionality and the 

posting of new transmission-related 

metrics. As explained in their motion, 

Tampa Electric and FPL currently use 

FLOASIS, the OASIS for transmission 

providers in Florida. Tampa Electric 

and FPL state that they are currently 

negotiating an agreement with a new 

host, Open Access Technology 

International, Inc. (OATI), and 

anticipate that their new OASIS system 

will not be operational until July 1, 

2007. If forced to meet the deadlines set 

forth in Order No. 890, Tampa Electric 

and FPL contend that they would be 

required to develop new software and 

manual processes on the current 

FLOASIS, which would become 

obsolete once they switch to the new 

OATI-hosted OASIS platform. 

10. EEI, on behalf of transmission 

providers not affiliated with an ISO or 

RTO, seeks in its March 23, 2007, 

motion an extension of certain of the 

compliance requirements in Order No. 

890 involving deadlines set at less than 

120 days from publication of the order 

in the Federal Register. This would 

include: the FPA section 206 

compliance filing requirement, the 

‘‘strawman’’ proposal deadline, and the 

deadlines set for the NERC and NAESB 

status reports. EEI contends that the 

volume and nature of the compliance 

requirements set forth in Order No. 890 

render these corresponding deadlines 

infeasible. To support its argument, EEI 

describes in detail many of the steps it 

believes are necessary for completion of 

the compliance requirements, such as 

the development of new software or 

modifications to existing software. 

11. In addition, EEI states particular 

concern regarding the time needed to 

develop software upgrades necessary to 

implement conditional firm service and 

planning redispatch. EEI also contends 

the current compliance schedule does 

not allow sufficient time to ensure that 

the new software and processes will not 

harm reliability. EEI therefore requests 

reconsideration of the Commission’s 

decision to make reforms involving 

NERC and NAESB activities effective in 

advance of associated development of 

business practices and standards. EEI 

requests the Commission abandon its 

requirement that transmission providers 

implement reforms on an individual 

basis prior to issuance of the final NERC 

and NAESB rules. 

12. EEI also requests the Commission 

delay other compliance deadlines until 

the Commission issues further 

clarification of Order No. 890. 

Specifically, EEI contends that without 

additional guidance from the 

Commission regarding revising 

transmission rates to reflect capacity 

benefit margin (CBM) set-aside, and 

prior to the issuance of the final NERC 

and NAESB standards, there may be 

significant inconsistencies in rate design 

among utilities, which could lead to 

hearing and settlement proceedings. EEI 

also states that transmission providers 

that make firm system sales need further 

clarification regarding the manner in 

which network resources should be 

designated and that, in the absence of 

such guidance, the Commission should 

not penalize transmission providers for 

their attempts to implement Order No. 

890. 

13. EEI further asks that the 

Commission clarify that the changes to 

Schedule 4 and Schedule 9 regarding 

imbalance charges need not become 

effective until the billing cycle 

immediately following the effective date 

of the revised pro forma OATT. EEI 

argues that requiring transmission 

providers to bill in two different billing 

methods for the same service over the 

course of a month would create the need 

for a complex software workaround. 

14. In conjunction with its various 

requests, EEI proposes to organize a 

public conference on or about May 14, 

2007, for participants to discuss 

progress made in their compliance 

efforts and any obstacles that have 

arisen. 

15. On March 29, 2007, EEI filed a 

second motion on behalf of transmission 

providers that are members of an ISO or 

RTO, requesting a similar extension for 

filing of the ‘‘strawman’’ proposals for 

those entities. EEI contends in this 

motion that it is not feasible for ISOs 

and RTOs, and their transmissionowning members, to obtain robust input 

from a broad range of stakeholders in 

time to meet the current 75-day 

deadline. According to EEI, this 

deadline will be particularly 

challenging for most ISOs, RTOs and 

transmission owners because of the time 

required to coordinate planning 

obligations. 

16. Answers to the EEI motions were 

filed by the American Public Power 

Association, National Rural Electric 

Cooperative Association, Transmission 

Access Policy Study Group, and 

Transmission Dependent Utility 

Systems (together the APPA Joint 

Commenters), the Mid-Continent Power 

Pool (MAPP) on behalf of its public 

utility members, Puget Sound Energy, 

Inc. (Puget), and the Electric Power 

Supply Association (EPSA). MAPP and 

Puget state full support of EEI’s March 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
19114 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 73 / Tuesday, April 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

10Order No. 890 also requested NERC and 

NAESB to submit status reports within 90 days of 

publication of the order in the Federal Register, i.e., 

June 13, 2007, containing work plans for developing 

standards and business practices associated with 

reforms adopted in Order No. 890. The limited 

extension of time granted here applies to actions to 

be taken by transmission providers and, thus, the 

NERC and NAESB filing deadlines remain 

unchanged. 

11EEI March 29 Motion at 2. 

12With specific regard to the CBM-related rate 

changes required in Order No. 890, we believe that 

EEI’s concerns are misplaced. Order No. 890 

expressly contemplated transmission providers 

proposing necessary changes to rate design to 

ensure that point-to-point customers do not pay a 

transmission charge that includes the cost of the 

CBM set-aside, provided that the subject of such 

rate filings be limited solely to the issue of CBMrelated cost recovery. See Order No. 890 at P 263. 

Nothing in Order No. 890 precludes transmission 

providers from proposing modification of rates for 

other services (such as network service) as 

necessary to recover CBM-related costs previously 

paid by point-to-point customers and, therefore, it 

is not necessary to extend the deadline for those 

filings. 

23, 2007, motion, reiterating many of 

the arguments made by EEI. While the 

APPA Joint Commenters do not object to 

the extensions of time requested by EEI, 

they request that the Commission 

provide at least 45 days to comment on 

transmission providers’ compliance 

filings if the requested extensions are 

granted. In support of their request, the 

APPA Joint Commenters contend that 

consolidation of the 60-day, 75-day, and 

90-day deadlines into a single 120-day 

deadline will impose increased burdens 

on interested parties reviewing those 

previously-staggered filings and 

postings. EPSA states its support of the 

APPA Joint Commenters’ request. 

17. The APPA Joint Commenters also 

express particular concern with two 

elements of the EEI motions. First, they 

argue that the Commission should only 

grant an extension of the requirement to 

complete software modifications on a 

case-by-case basis and, even then, only 

on a showing of clear and convincing 

need. Second, the APPA Joint 

Commenters argue that, if the 

Commission grants EEI’s request to 

delay posting of the ‘‘strawman’’

proposals, the associated technical 

conferences should also be delayed in 

order to maintain a 15- to 45-day period 

for stakeholder review of the 

‘‘strawman’’ postings. 

18. On April 3, 2007, E.ON filed a 

motion supporting EEI’s request to 

allow utilities not participating in an 

ISO or RTO an additional 60 days to 

comply with the non-rate terms and 

conditions set out in Order No. 890. 

E.ON contends, however, that it is 

different from most stand-alone utilities 

because it must coordinate compliance 

efforts with the Southwest Power Pool, 

the independent transmission 

organization for E.ON’s transmission 

system, as well as the Tennessee Valley 

Authority, which serves as the 

reliability coordinator for E.ON’s 

transmission system. E.ON therefore 

requests a 90-day extension to submit its 

FPA section 206 compliance filing, 

rather than the 60-day extension 

requested by EEI. 

19. On April 9, 2007, PGE filed a 

motion requesting an extension of the 

deadline to submit FPA section 205 

filings relating to previously-approved 

variations from the pro forma OATT. To 

the extent the Commission grants EEI’s 

request for an extension of the date to 

submit the FPA section 206 compliance 

filings, PGE requests that the 

Commission also generically extend the 

date of the FPA section 205 filings by 

60 days. PGE further requests that, as to 

its own FPA section 205 filing, the 

Commission permit it to delay that 

filing until after the Commission issues 

its order on rehearing in this 

proceeding. 

III. Commission Determination 

20. The Commission partially grants 

EEI’s request and extends the date on 

which reforms adopted in Order No. 890 

would have otherwise been effective by 

60 days, i.e., to July 13, 2007, except as 

provided for below. Specifically, all 

transmission providers that have not 

been approved as ISOs or RTOs, and 

whose transmission facilities are not 

under the control of an ISO or RTO, are 

required to submit FPA section 206 

compliance filings that contain the nonrate terms and conditions set forth in 

Order No. 890 within 120 days of 

publication of the order in the Federal 

Register, i.e., July 13, 2007. Similarly, 

transmission providers must take all 

other actions necessary to implement 

the reforms adopted in Order No. 890, 

except as provided for below, on or 

before July 13, 2007, unless a later 

compliance date was otherwise 

specified in the order.10

21. With regard to the requirement for 

transmission providers to post 

‘‘strawman’’ proposals for compliance 

with the nine planning principles 

adopted in Order No. 890, we deny 

EEI’s requests for extension and retain 

the requirement that such postings be 

made within 75 days of publication of 

the order in the Federal Register, i.e., 

May 29, 2007. The ‘‘strawman’’

proposals are necessary to facilitate the 

technical conferences that the 

Commission has scheduled in June 2007 

to encourage discussion as to how 

transmission providers ultimately 

intend to fulfill their planning 

requirements. Due to the delay in 

Federal Register publication, the 

‘‘strawman’’ posting date is more than 

100 days after Order No. 890 was 

issued, which is consistent with EEI’s 

assertion that the Commission typically 

provides 90 to 120 days for RTO and 

ISO efforts that require stakeholder 

participation.11 In any event, the 

‘‘strawman’’ proposals are only one 

aspect of the compliance process. The 

actual Attachment K compliance filing 

deadline is not until October 11, 2007. 

Transmission providers will therefore 

have roughly four months to prepare 

their Attachment K filings after the 

Commission holds technical 

conferences to discuss the ‘‘strawman’’

proposals. We believe this is sufficient 

time to ensure timely compliance with 

the Attachment K filing deadline. 

22. With regard to imbalance charges, 

however, we agree that it would be 

reasonable for a transmission provider 

to extend the date on which the 

imbalance-related provisions adopted in 

Schedule 4 and Schedule 9 become 

effective until the first day of the billing 

cycle following the effectiveness of the 

underlying imbalance-related reforms. 

Specifically, transmission providers 

submitting their imbalance provisions 

in section 206 filings on or before July 

13, 2007, may specify that those 

provisions will become effective on the 

first day of the billing cycle following 

the filing date. We agree that this 

modest extension of the effectiveness of 

imbalance-related reforms will facilitate 

the implementation of those reforms. 

23. The Commission is not convinced 

that EEI’s remaining requests for 

extension or further generic 

modification of Order No. 890’s 

compliance obligations are necessary. 

Although the Commission is aware of 

the challenges of compliance with Order 

No. 890, we are not persuaded that the 

related deadlines, as modified herein, 

are unreasonable or unclear. Order No. 

890 is the result of a multi-year 

proceeding during which the 

Commission sought and received 

multiple rounds of comments from over 

300 parties. The various compliance 

obligations in Order No. 890, including 

CBM-related modification of rates and 

implementation of interim workarounds 

pending development of final NERC and 

NAESB standards and business 

practices, were established after full 

consideration of these comments and 

the Commission’s determination that 

related reforms are necessary to remedy 

the potential for undue 

discrimination.12 EEI has not persuaded 

us that generic modification of those 

obligations pending final standards and 

practice development by NERC and 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 73 / Tuesday, April 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 19115 

13Although Order No. 890 directed NERC and 

NAESB to develop standards and business practices 

necessary to implement ATC-related reforms within 

270 and 360 days of publication of the order in the 

Federal Register, respectively, it did not establish 

a specific timeframe for NAESB’s development of 

business practices necessary for remaining reforms. 

Instead, NAESB was requested to submit a work 

plan within 90 days of publication of the order in 

the Federal Register, upon review of which the 

Commission will issue an order establishing further 

compliance deadlines as necessary. See Order No. 

890 at P 141. 

14As provided in Order No. 890, however, 

transmission providers should request that the tariff 

provisions proposed in their optional 205 filings be 

made effective as of the date the transmission 

provider submits its section 206 compliance filing, 

which must now be on or before July 13, 2007. See 

id. at P 139. 

15See PGE Motion at 3. 

NAESB would be appropriate.13 Any 

issues specific to a transmission 

provider’s ability to comply with the 

requirements of Order No. 890, as 

modified herein, may be considered 

during the compliance process on a 

case-by-case basis. For similar reasons, 

we deny the APPA Joint Commenters’

request to establish in advance of the 

compliance process the number of days 

parties will have to comment on 

compliance filings. 

24. The Commission also denies 

E.ON’s request to extend its FPA section 

206 compliance filing deadline by 90 

days instead of the 60-day extension 

requested by EEI, granted above. All 

transmission providers must coordinate 

their compliance efforts with personnel 

internal and external to their 

organizations. We recognize these 

efforts will be complicated but, as 

explained above, they are the logical 

outgrowth of this multi-year proceeding. 

E.ON fails to justify the need for 

differential treatment during the 

compliance process. 

25. Finally, the Commission denies 

PGE’s request to extend the FPA section 

205 deadlines relating to previouslyapproved variations from the pro forma 

OATT. The optional section 205 

procedure was established so that 

transmission providers would have an 

opportunity to demonstrate that any 

previously-approved variations 

continue to be consistent with or 

superior to the terms and conditions of 

the reformed pro forma OATT, thereby 

allowing those transmission providers 

to retain those variations during 

implementation of Order No. 890. It is 

not necessary, as PGE assumes, to 

extend the 30-day deadline for 

submission of the section 205 filings 

simply because we extend the deadline 

for the section 206 compliance filings 

above.14 The purpose of each filing is 

distinct and PGE offers no reason as to 

why transmission providers may need 

additional time to prepare their section 

205 filings, which relate only to tariff 

provisions the Commission has already 

reviewed and approved. Moreover, 

deferring the deadline for PGE’s FPA 

section 205 filing until after our order 

on rehearing in this proceeding would 

not achieve PGE’s stated goal of 

ensuring that its previously-approved 

deviations remain in effect during the 

compliance process.15 In the section 206 

compliance filing, each transmission 

provider must conform the non-rate 

terms and conditions of its OATT to the 

reformed non-rate terms and conditions 

of the pro forma OATT. Failure to 

request that previously-approved 

variations remain in place in advance of 

submitting the compliance filing will 

result in those provisions being 

eliminated during the compliance 

process. 

26. In light of the extension of certain 

deadlines for compliance with Order 

No. 890 provided for above, the request 

for extension submitted by FPL and 

Tampa Electric is moot. 

The Commission Orders 

(A) The date on which the reforms 

adopted in Order No. 890 would have 

otherwise been effective is hereby 

extended by 60 days, i.e., to July 13, 

2007, except as otherwise provided in 

the body of this order. 

(B) The request for extension 

submitted by FPL and Tampa Electric is 

dismissed as moot. 

(C) The request for extensions 

submitted by E.ON and PGE are denied. 

(D) The Secretary shall promptly 

publish a copy of this order in the 

Federal Register. 

By the Commission. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

Appendix A: Summary of Compliance 

Filing Requirements 

For a more detailed description of 

compliance obligations please refer to Order 

No. 890 paragraph number. For further 

information related to Order No. 890, such as 

electronic versions of the pro forma OATT 

showing tariff changes adopted in Order No. 

890 in redline/strikeout format, and further 

information regarding docketing of 

compliance filings and specific filing 

instructions, please visit our Web site at the 

following location: http://www.ferc.gov/ 

industries/electric/indus-act/oatt-reform.asp. 

Deadline (days after 

publication in the Fed. 

Reg.) 

Compliance action Order No. 890 

paragraph No. 

30 (4/16/2007) ........... Optional Implementation FPA section 205 filings allowing transmission providers to propose previously approved variations from the pro forma OATT that have been affected by pro forma OATT 

reforms to remain in effect subject to a demonstration that such variations continue to be consistent 

with or superior to the revised pro forma OATT (non RTO/ISO transmission providers). Such optional filings must request a 90 day effective date to facilitate Commission review under section 205.

P 139 

75 (5/29/2007) ........... Transmission Providers must post a ‘‘strawman’’ proposal for compliance with each of the nine planning principles adopted in Order No. 890. This may be posted on the Transmission Providers Web 

site or its OASIS site.

P 443 

90 (6/13/2007) ........... NERC/NAESB status report and work plan for completion of ATC related business practices and 

standards.

P 223 

NAESB status report and work plan for completion of OASIS functionality or uniform business practices (other than those related to ATC).P 141 

120 (7/13/2007) ......... Transmission Providers that have not been approved as ISOs or RTOs, and whose transmission facilities are not under the control of an ISO or RTO, must submit FPA section 206 filings that contain the non-rate terms and conditions set forth in Order No. 890. These filings need only contain 

the revised provisions adopted in Order No. 890. Transmission providers utilizing the optional implementation FPA section 205 filing described above, need only submit tariff sheets necessary to 

implement the remaining modifications required under the Order No. 890, i.e., modifications related 

to tariff provisions that did not implicate previously-approved variations.

P 135 

120 (7/13/2007) ......... Transmission Providers must submit redesigned transmission charges that reflect the Capacity Benefit Margin set-aside through a limited issue section 205 rate filing as part of their initial ATC related compliance filings.P 263 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
19116 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 73 / Tuesday, April 17, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

*This fee has not been changed. 

Deadline (days after 

publication in the Fed. 

Reg.) 

Compliance action Order No. 890 

paragraph No. 

180 (9/11/2007) ......... Submit compliance filings with Attachment C (ATC) of the pro forma OATT .......................................... P 140 

210 (10/11/2007) ....... ISOs and RTOs, and transmission providers located within an ISO/RTO footprint, submit FPA section 

206 filings that contain the non-rate terms and conditions set forth in Order No. 890. These filings 

need only contain the revised provisions adopted in Order No. 890 or a demonstration that previously approved variations continue to be consistent with or superior to the revised pro forma 

OATT.

P 157 

P 161 

210 (10/11/2007) ....... Submit compliance filings with Attachment K (Planning) of the pro forma OATT or RTOs and ISOs file 

a demonstration that their planning processes are consistent with or superior to the planning principles in Order No. 890.

P 140 

P 422 

N/A ............................. N/A Transmission Providers must file a revised Attachment C to incorporate any changes to NERC’s 

and NAESB’s reliability and business practice standards to achieve consistency in ATC within 60 

days of completion of the NERC and NAESB processes.

P 325 

N/A ............................. After the submission of FPA section 206 compliance filings, transmission providers may submit FPA 

section 205 filings proposing rates for the services provided for in the tariff, as well as non-rate 

terms and conditions that differ from those set forth in Order No. 890 if those provisions are ‘‘consistent with or superior to’’ the pro forma OATT.

P 135 

[FR Doc. E7–7229 Filed 4–16–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 381 

[Docket No. RM07–12] 

Annual Update of Filing Fees 

April 9, 2007. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Final rule; annual update of 

Commission filing fees. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with 18 CFR 

381.104, the Commission issues this 

update of its filing fees. This notice 

provides the yearly update using data in 

the Commission’s Management, 

Administrative, and Payroll System to 

calculate the new fees. The purpose of 

updating is to adjust the fees on the 

basis of the Commission’s costs for 

Fiscal Year 2006. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 17, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Misiewicz, Office of the 

Executive Director, Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Room 4R–03, Washington, 

DC 20426, 202–502–6240. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Document 

Availability: In addition to publishing 

the full text of this document in the 

Federal Register, the Commission 

provides all interested persons an 

opportunity to view and/or print the 

contents of this document via the 

Internet through FERC’s Home Page 

(http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC’s 

Public Reference Room during normal 

business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 

Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., 

Room 2A, Washington DC 20426. 

From FERC’s Web site on the Internet, 

this information is available in the 

eLibrary (formerly FERRIS). The full 

text of this document is available on 

eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word 

format for viewing, printing, and/or 

downloading. To access this document 

in eLibrary, type the docket number 

excluding the last three digits of this 

document in the docket number field 

and follow other directions on the 

search page. 

User assistance is available for 

eLibrary and other aspects of FERC’s 

website during normal business hours. 

For assistance, contact FERC Online 

Support at 

FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or toll 

free at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY, 

contact (202) 502–8659. 

Annual Update of Filing Fees 

The Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission (Commission) is issuing 

this notice to update filing fees that the 

Commission assesses for specific 

services and benefits provided to 

identifiable beneficiaries. Pursuant to 18 

CFR 381.104, the Commission is 

establishing updated fees on the basis of 

the Commission’s Fiscal Year 2006 

costs. The adjusted fees announced in 

this notice are effective May 17, 2007. 

The Commission has determined, with 

the concurrence of the Administrator of 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs of the Office of Management and 

Budget, that this final rule is not a major 

rule within the meaning of section 251 

of Subtitle E of Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, 5 

U.S.C. 804(2). The Commission is 

submitting this final rule to both houses 

of the United States Congress and to the 

Comptroller General of the United 

States. 

The new fee schedule is as follows: 

Fees Applicable to the Natural Gas 

Policy Act: 

1. Petitions for rate approval pursuant 

to 18 CFR 284.123(b)(2). (18 CFR 

381.403): $10,420. 

Fees Applicable to General Activities: 

1. Petition for issuance of a 

declaratory order (except under Part I of 

the Federal Power Act). (18 CFR 

381.302(a)): $20,940. 

2. Review of a Department of Energy 

remedial order: 

Amount in controversy: 

$0–9,999 (18 CFR 381.303(b)): $100. 

$10,000–29,999 (18 CFR 381.303(b)): 

$600. 

$30,000 or more (18 CFR 381.303(a)): 

$30,560. 

3. Review of a Department of Energy 

denial of adjustment: 

Amount in controversy: 

$0–9,999 (18 CFR 381.304(b)): $100. 

$10,000–29,999 (18 CFR 381.304(b)): 

$600. 

$30,000 or more (18 CFR 381.304(a)) 

$16,020. 

4. Written legal interpretations by the 

Office of General Counsel (18 CFR 

381.305(a)): $6,000. 

Fees Applicable to Natural Gas 

Pipelines: 

1. Pipeline certificate applications 

pursuant to 18 CFR 284.224 (18 CFR 

381.207(b)): $1,000*

Fees Applicable to Cogenerators and 

Small Power Producers: 

1. Certification of qualifying status as 

a small power production facility (18 

CFR 381.505(a)): $18,000. 

2. Certification of qualifying status as 

a cogeneration facility (18 CFR 

381.505(a)): $20,380. 

The Commission is eliminating the 

fee for applications for exempt 

wholesale generator status. 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES